Liu v. Chertoff et al
| Li Liu |
| United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and Carol Jenifer |
| 2:2007cv10471 |
| January 30, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Detroit Office |
| Wayne |
| Nancy G Edmunds |
| R Steven Whalen |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| No cause code entered |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 21, 2007. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 AMENDED JUDGMENT Signed by Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem) |
| Filing 14 AMENDED ORDER re #12 Order on Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem) |
| Filing 13 JUDGMENT: Plaintiff is REMANDED to the USCIS for a determination within 120 days of Plaintiffs application for naturalization. Signed by Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem) |
Filing 12
ORDER granting in part and denying in part #5 Motion to Dismiss, or In the Alternative, to Remand. Signed by Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem)
|
| Minute Entry -Motion Hearing held on 9/19/2007 re #5 MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Remand filed by Michael Chertoff, Emilio T. Gonzalez, Carol Jenifer before Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (Court Reporter Joan Morgan) (CHem) |
| Reset Deadlines as to #5 MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Remand. Motion Hearing re-set for 9/19/2007 01:00 PM before Honorable Nancy G Edmunds (CHem) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of hearing on #5 MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Remand. Motion Hearing set for 9/12/2007 02:00 PM before Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem) |
| Filing 10 RESPONSE to #5 MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Remand filed by Li Liu. (Attachments: #1 Index of Exhibits Index of Exhibits#2 Exhibit Exhibit A: Naos v Swacina#3 Exhibit Exhibit B: Abdelkarim v Gonzales#4 Exhibit Exhibit C: Walji v Gonzales) (Vernon, Alexander) |
|
Filing 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER extending response date to 7/5/2007 re #5 MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Remand Signed by Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem)
|
| Filing 8 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Michael E. Piston appearing on behalf of Li Liu (Piston, Michael) |
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Alexander G. Vernon appearing on behalf of Li Liu (Vernon, Alexander) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER Setting Briefing Schedule as to #5 MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Remand : Response due by 6/4/2007 Signed by Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem)
|
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Remand by all defendants. (Attachments: #1 Index of Exhibits #2 Exhibit A - Reaves Declaration#3 Exhibit B - Cannon Declaration#4 Exhibit C - Fact Sheet#5 Exhibit D - Al Saidi v. Jenifer#6 Exhibit E - Zhang v. Chertoff#7 Exhibit F - Mahmood v. Jenifer#8 Exhibit G - Garcia-Guerra v. Chertoff#9 Exhibit H - Walji v. Gonzales) (Wicks, L.) |
| Filing 4 STIPULATED ORDER Extending time to respond to complaint; Response due by 5/3/2007 Signed by Honorable Nancy G Edmunds. (CHem) |
| Filing 3 STIPULATION re #1 Complaint for Extension of Time to Respond by Michael Chertoff, Emilio T. Gonzalez, Carol Jenifer (Wicks, L.) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of Service/Summons Returned Executed. U.S. Attorney on behalf of Michael Chertoff served on 2/12/2007, answer due 4/13/2007; Emilio T. Gonzalez served on 2/17/2007, answer due 4/18/2007; Carol Jenifer served on 2/1/2007, answer due 4/2/2007. (AGre) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Li Liu against defendants, Receipt No: 6437 - Fee: $ 350.(PPaul, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Michigan Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
